With Canon releasing an updated version of the Cine-Servo 50-1000 I thought I should bring this up again. I don't for the life of me understand why there would not be a market for a decent, modern, native glass lens that has something like a 50-500mm zoom range, built in Drop-in filter slot, and built in 1.4x tele-extender. It would not have to be fast, f/6.3 or so would be enough at the tele end, and not really have to be very light. It could sell for $7k or even anything up to almost $10k and people would really use it quite a bit for wildlife video. There really isn't anything that fits this niche now. Most people that don't have access to the $70k cine lenses use something like the Sigma 60-600 just because there really isn't anything in between.

Bob Howland said:

In defense of rocker zoom switches, among my excess of equipment, I own a Canon Vixia HFG60 camcorder. (I think Neuro owns one also.) The zoom is controlled by an onboard rocker switch that is extremely difficult to use well. That problem disappeared when I started using a Manfrotto LANC Controller with it's own superb rocker switch. The controller also has a dial which controls the speed of the zoom throughout the rocker switch's range. With that controller it is possible to have reliably controlled zooms from glacially slow to lightning fast.

Click to expand...

Yes, I have an HF G60. I bought it after the G70 launched, and picked the older version for the larger sensor. I suspect Canon stopped using that in the Vixia line because it was 'too close' to the XA professional cameras. To me, it seems like the G60 is most of an XA camcorder except the XLR handle. The other reason is that I was replacing a Vixia HF M41 for which I had the mini-hotshoe shotgun mic, and for some reason Canon dropped the mini-hotshoe from the G70 (even though all the G-series camcorders before had it).

The rocker on the camcorder is not ideal, I agree. I was unaware of the Manfrotto LANC controller, thanks much for the mention – I have the MVR901EPLA in my cart for my next order. I already use a Manfrotto 608 Nitrotech fluid head, so it's perfect.

Bob Howland said:

This raises a few questions. Do any MILC hybrid cameras have a LANC input? Does it seem likely that any will have one? Does anybody care whether they do or not?

Click to expand...

The C50 and C80 have a LANC input. The R50 V has a 2.5mm jack but it's for the E3 remote trigger and I doubt it would work with a LANC controller.

GMCPhotographics said:

It’s fair to say then that the R8II is likely to also share the same 32.5mp sensor with IBIS

Click to expand...

If the R8ii sticks with the current form factor and hence a LP-E17 battery, I would struggle to see how they can implement IBIS. As it is, the R8 already has a relatively low CIPA rating of 150-220 (standard to power-saving modes using EVF). Adding IBIS would reduce that further, let alone having overheating occuring (much) earlier. These might make the camera potentially rather frustrating to use.

AlanF said:

There was still a cult of the EF 400 f/5.6 L when the EF 100-400 II came out. I suppose the built-in lens hood and kudos of owning a prime. made up for the 3.5m close focus, lack of IS and being less sharp even on Canon's own MTF charts.

Click to expand...

It was a fraction of the price, so for kids and bird curious folk it was a palatable entry. Canon had long since clawed back the R&D costs and it didn't kill them to keep this one on tap as a gateway drug to more serious L products.

blackcoffee17 said:

Even the EF 100-400 II was better than the prime. Sharper at 400mm and much more flexible. I owned both.

Click to expand...

But it took the version II to beat it, as I recall. And that came out years later, right? So for the era, it was top notch for amateurs.

homebodyMacro2 said:

Honestly, if the 300-600 f/5.6 L is either never happening or $12,000 USD, I would be happy to have this lens instead. Does anyone have an expected price? I'd imagine at least $5-6k, but that's a lot more forgiving than $11k+

Click to expand...

The Sigma L and E 500mm 5.6 lists for $4,400 CAD and is often on sale for $3,999 CAD. Canon would probably add a premium if the lens were an L, but if the lens is a silver ring like the 200-800 I think they could be very competitive.

neuroanatomist said:

It's a slippery slope. [...]

Click to expand...

So true! Once I stopped being a grad student I first built out my zoom trinity, and then worked on my people prime trinity, and then some esoteric stuff; plus there's a few things I inherited. But even in the mid-range there's always something else to narrow in on a case. (I don't have a 35mm, but I want one...)

My bird shots are all casual and so usually opportunistic and therefore not my top captures by any stretch — but they are fun! Our acreage includes a few ponds in conifer forests at some height in the mountains, and thus eagles frequent them. Plus we have animals like ducks, and eagles like ducks. The ducks are safe in large ranges with netting, but the eagles do like to watch the live show. Anyhow, I was headed across a fallow field and saw this young eagle splashing about in a puddle following the rain. 300mm f4 IS + 2x II at ISO 1600, f/8 (so lens DOF at f/4 magnified x2), 1/2000s — taken as hastily as I could quietly yank the parts from my backpack, assemble, then shoot. Probably at a range of 200 feet. I think the focus ended up on the wing. Still, it makes a nice print for the barn.



I think I'll always keep the 300, and it works very well with the 1.4. If I had a 500 5.6 and an RF 1.4 to go with it I'd make some regular excuses to travel up and down the coast with this kind of photography in mind.

Edit: P.S. — I love your bird shots! That hawk, wow!

AlanF said:

The sunny 16 rule is that at iso 100 you need 1/100s at f/16. So, at f/11 you need 1/200s. f/8 1/400s etc etc to 1/3200s at f/2.8. (Not 1/6400s).

Click to expand...

Thanks. I found a handy chart that further explains it. It’s going to take me some time and practice to get handy at this.

Click said:

Great shots! Well done, danfaz.

Click to expand...

Thanks, Click!

Salamander said:

I thought I understood the sunny 16 rule, but apparently not. My understanding is if the ISO is 100 then the shutter speed should be 1/100, not 1/6,400. I’m new to this, so I need more help understanding this.

Click to expand...

The sunny 16 rule is that at iso 100 you need 1/100s at f/16. So, at f/11 you need 1/200s. f/8 1/400s etc etc to 1/3200s at f/2.8. (Not 1/6400s).

MkSprintz said:

I believe the R7ii is slated for late May/early June though I still feel a November release is more likely.

Click to expand...

May/June is based on the assumption that the DS126933 FCC filing refers to the R7 Mark II. It's safe to assume now that it does not. All the "leaks" (glorified rumors) from the past few months are crumbling in front of your eyes.
It's completely possible that Canon announces it a month after the R6V, after all they target two very different markets so they wouldn't interfere with one another, and the R7II could be shipped out by mid-summer for birders, but there's nothing to back that release window.

I wouldn't get my hopes too high up for the R7 Mark II. Back in May 2025 the R6 Mark III was rumored to have a 24 MP stacked BSI-CMOS sensor with a DIGIC Accelerator and a faster readout than the R5 Mark II. We got none of that. It's safer to assume we'll get a refreshed sensor (possibly BSI) with faster readout without hurting dynamic range. Just enough to address, at least partly, the biggest issues with the R7 like the rolling shutter and AF performance.

In defense of rocker zoom switches, among my excess of equipment, I own a Canon Vixia HFG60 camcorder. (I think Neuro owns one also.) The zoom is controlled by an onboard rocker switch that is extremely difficult to use well. That problem disappeared when I started using a Manfrotto LANC Controller with it's own superb rocker switch. The controller also has a dial which controls the speed of the zoom throughout the rocker switch's range. With that controller it is possible to have reliably controlled zooms from glacially slow to lightning fast.

This raises a few questions. Do any MILC hybrid cameras have a LANC input? Does it seem likely that any will have one? Does anybody care whether they do or not?

Great shots! Well done, danfaz.

R5MkII and 200-800 @ 800

1. I'm certain that with monopod-required great whites I could do better, but for my needs the 200-800 + R5MKII enabled acquisitions of these shots that in a way that works for me. Specifically, the sensor resolution, the IS in the lens and the R5MkII...and the reach of the lens--these images were cropped but not enlarged via AI software. Well done Canon. Well done.

2. I believe it is iSV that resides in Hawaii, and supplies images of birds that are so unlike most anything I see here in the midwest USA (I am not a real birder). But in April of each year, the breeding American Goldfinches (especially the males) get...GOLD! I hope to return to Kauai later this year...but for now here is about as much color that I see. (EDIT: save male cardinals, bluebirds and blue jays).

GMCPhotographics said:

It’s fair to say then that the R8II is likely to also share the same 32.5mp sensor with IBIS

Click to expand...

I´m struggling with that assumption. As posted in a different thread:
Canon could easily reuse the 24mp sensor for the r8ii and use it for further market segmentation with a 24 - 33 - 45 mp line up. I´d actually expect them to do just that.

R5MkII and 200-800 @ 800

White-throated Sparrow

What is the difference between vented and active cooling? In the same way, the R5m2 is vented and needs a fan grip to keep it actively cooled?

R5MkII and 200-800 @ 800

Many years ago (and for decades), I admired the photography within the US-based magazine Sports Illustrated.

Their cover photographs, in particular, were often stunningly beautiful.

I remember wondering why photos taken at NFL (American football) games in which there was snow on the ground looked...so wonderful!

Now I surmise that reflected light from the snow-covered turf enables the facial details that you often don't get to see in football games.

I think the same thing happens in our birdbath (if the sky is right, reflections from the water (EDIT: and the white color of the bottom of the bath) are enabled, at least for the undersides of the birds).

Northern Mockingbird

neuroanatomist said:

The 24-105/2.8L and newer 70-200/2.8L are Z lenses, not PZ lenses. AFAIK, there is only one Canon PZ lens to date (not counting the Cine Servo zoom lenses). The 'Z' lenses require the PZ-E2 accessory for motorized zoom, otherwise they are regular zoom lenses with a regular, mechanical zoom ring. As you might expect from the '2' there was a PZ-E1 that provided power zoom capability specifically for the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens.

Have a look at the only other PZ lens, the RF-S 14-30mm F4-6.3 IS STM PZ. PZ means the zoom motor is inside the lens, not in a separate accessory. The zoom ring has no manual function. Turning it one way or the other just activates the built-in zoom motor (in a force-sensitive way so the zoom can be driven at different speeds). Personally, I would not want a zoom lens with only a motorized zoom function for photography. YMMV.

View attachment 229041

Click to expand...

OOOPS, I was mistaken...

dwkdnvr said:

Unfortunately, this seems like it may be the 'May event' where 'we' thought the R7II was going to be announced. Hopefully that doesn't mean it's back in limbo.

Click to expand...

I believe the R7ii is slated for late May/early June though I still feel a November release is more likely.

AlanF said:

There was still a cult of the EF 400 f/5.6 L when the EF 100-400 II came out. I suppose the built-in lens hood and kudos of owning a prime. made up for the 3.5m close focus, lack of IS and being less sharp even on Canon's own MTF charts.

Click to expand...

I was a bit disappointed about the 400 prime when i got it first time many years ago. Everyone was raving about it and i never found it tack sharp. It was just good, not amazing.

Canon Rumors said:

I think I named it incorrectly. It works like certain car steering setups that are called "by wire". Electrical current (the wire) to a servo that doesn't have any manual input other than a rocker switch (the steering wheel), unlike power steering, which would sort of be a normal zoom ring. There could be a different name and for it in this sort of application.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I think you were spot on and zoom-by-wire is the right name. My issue is really about the switch mechanism to control the zoom. Often that's a rocker switch of some sort, and that's different from a zoom ring. Canon designed the RF-S 14-30 PZ with a rocker switch in the form of a ring, but it's still a rocker switch. With the RF lens focus-by-wire, you rotate the focus ring freely around the lens and the focus motor moves.

With the RF-S 14-30 PZ, you rotate the zoom ring a little bit and the lens zooms at low speed, you rotate the zoom ring a little more then it hits a stop and the lens zooms at high speed. The 'zoom ring rotation' is just a short travel over probably something like a 10° arc, 5° each way from center position to hit the high speed setting. To me, that's not zooming like any other lens – it's a different control mechanism. Not the 'by-wire' part but the 'ring' part.

neuroanatomist said:

I’m surprised by the L designation for the PZ lens. 20-50mm is a useful ‘walkaround’ range and the lens will probably be compact and optically excellent (at least for those who don’t mind forced distortion correction at the wide end), but I don’t see any utility of a power zoom for photography.

Click to expand...

I agree with you, that does seem a bit weird for a lens with such a short zoom range (2.5x) to have power zoom. I would have imagined a PZ feature to be more useful on something like an updated 24-240mm RF lens (10x zoom) for videographers. I loved the old Canon EF 17-40mm F/4.0 L lens though, and I'd be happy to see the 20-50mm compact zoom lens that gives a bit more on both ends without becoming a boat anchor.

JensR said:

You do realise there is still the R6MII and the new R6MIII with IBIS and pretty photo centric, and they even have an EVF! And btw, they can do "a bit" of video too.
And the best thing: They even work as backup cameras, if needed.
Why would you even consider a "V" camera model for that?

Click to expand...

Size and weight.
I have an R5m2. I'm definitely not considering another fullsize body.
Plus, think about it. If you have fullsize and a compact, you have 3 options when needing to decide what to take. 1) full 2) compact 3) full+compact. It's great to have the option to just take the compact for a family happening, street photo, hiking, whatever.

I might be over-explaining - you buy compact camera because it is compact and a fullsize body is not an alternative.

Im honestly very excited for this one, I already have the R5ii for photos and the C50 for my films, this R6V would be perfect for everyday vlogs hoping that 20-5mm lens stays on the smaller size, open gate and IBIS are very good for this camera... People here saying or mentioning they want it for photo I do not think this camera will be that, its a "V" version which in my understanding stands for video focused....